Frank Girardot: A plan to cut California six ways makes sense in Aztlan

Some Northern California millionaire recently came with the brilliant idea of dividing up California into six mini Golden States.

It’s a plan that has been a long time coming — and if it gets enough signatures it will qualify for the November statewide ballot.

Tim Draper, described by the Associated Press as “a Silicon Valley venture capitalist” says the state has grown so big and so inefficient, it’s essentially ungovernable.

In a nutshell, here’s the proposal that was reviewed by the California Secretary of State and the Attorney General:

The measure “divides California into six states subject to approval by Congress. Assigns each county to a new state, unless county voters approve reassignment to different new state and second state approves. Establishes commission to settle California’s financial affairs after division; upon failure to resolve, each new state would retain assets within its boundaries and would receive proportionate distribution of California’s debts based on population. Authorizes counties to refuse to provide State-mandated programs and services absent sufficient State reimbursement. Empowers counties to make and enforce all laws governing local affairs.”

The six states created in the plan would be:

• “Jefferson” — aka southern Oregon. Sometimes referred to as the “Lost Coast.” They grow a ton of “medical” marijuana in Humboldt and there’s not much else to do except smoke it.

• “North California” — essentially wine country, this is Napa and Sonoma and its cotiere of brie-eating, hot-tub loving denizens who would likely provide a great market for Jefferson’s surplus “produce”;

• “Silicon Valley” — call it the Bay Area and central coast, or just call it Google or Yahoo or Ebay or AMD or Intel. All of California’s intellect and its money would be combined in this tiny state. These are S.F. Giants and 49ers fans;

Advertisement

• “Central California” — the boonies of the San Joaquin Valley, think the Joads in “Grapes of Wrath.” That’s the Central Valley. It’s hot, it smells and where would its capital be? Modesto? Tulare? Delano? Bakersfield? Pixley? Central California would be a super poor state on a par with Mississippi or Alabama. Not sure residents of “Central California” would go for this plan.

• “West California” — “Al A” as the natives know it. I think this would be basically Los Angeles and Ventura counties. We get a lot of coastline, a lot of people, a lot of freeways, a lot of bad air quality and a lot of political corruption. We’d probably be run by the five-member and super elite Board of Supes though, making our unicameral “legislature” the most efficient in the whole U.S. of A. So we got that — plus the Dodgers and most of the remaining Raiders fans.

• “South California” — really this is just the Inland Empire and San Diego. Mostly a vast wasteland of oversized suburban homes and underwater mortgages. San Diego is nice, though. We should try to get it for West California.

Which reminds me, These proposed names? Ummm, not buying the plan without some sizzle. Take Jefferson. Call your state “Weed.” Rename the 101 as state route 420 and you’ve got a sure fire marketing plan that pretty nicely sets up your new state to do some interstate commerce with Colorado and Washington.

For the same reason, North California should go with something French sounding. Brie is good, Chardonnay is better. Lots of builders in Temecula name their developments after wine grapes. It sounds classy.

Silicon Valley? Leave it as is. It’s going to be called that no matter what.

Central California though has a chance to honor the old California’s Chinese heritage and get the poverty monkey off its back. My suggestion is take a lesson from Feng Shui practitioners and call the new state Money. After that who cares if the capital is in Earlimart or Buttonwillow?

West California, I think we need to embrace Aztlan and become it. Other than that nothing changes.

South California? Call it Menifee? Temeculetta? Salton? I don’t know.

What ever happens, the first — and best — reason to vote for “California Six” is that it gets Sacramento out of our business.

But there’s a bottom line.

Just like in a divorce, there’s winners and losers.

Thanks to that anti-Angeleno bias so inherent up north, L.A. gets it in the shorts on the money end if the plan passes. We’ll be eating Spam and Top Ramen for a while, but at least we will be finally rid of northern bias and rubes who fled L.A. for ridiculous land deals in the Inland Empire.

Adios from Aztlan.

Frank Girardot is the senior editor of the San Gabriel Valley Newspaper Group. @FrankGirardot on Twitter